January 17, 2005

Clarence Thomas: God Before Constitution Via Sam Heldman According to The Birmingham News:
Many stood and applauded former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore as he walked to the stage to administer the oath to Parker. Moore's action was ceremonial, since Parker took his formal oath of office Thursday before U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in Washington. Parker said Thomas told him a judge should be evaluated by whether he faithfully upholds his oath to God, not to the people, to the state or to the Constitution.
Does Thomas really feel that a Justice should put God over the Constitution or was Parker blowing smoke? Thomas will likely

Does Thomas really feel that a Justice should put God over the Constitution or was Parker blowing smoke? Thomas will be the next Chief Justice. I know he has stated that he doesn't want the job. If that was the case he simply would have told the White House he wasn't interested and the interview would never have happened. Michael Kinsley shares his thoughts on Thomas.

But Clarence Thomas is different, because his famous 1991 confirmation was different. His strategy was to do or say anything that would allow him to crawl past the finish line. When the prize is a virtually invulnerable lifetime appointment, that's a good strategy. But it can, and should, come back to haunt you when you put in for a promotion. Thomas' performances at the hearings, as well as the things we know now that we didn't know then, and even the things we knew then but were bullied or rushed into ignoring, are not just fair game
posted by Sullivan 19 years ago
  • GYOB.
  • a) Sully has a blog. b) Why is this post a problem?
  • Is there a legal process to remove a justice?
  • Also take a look at Blinded by The Right if you haven't already.
  • This Thomas needs a visit from mr Bullet.
  • This post is a problem because of the multiple multi-paragraph quotes. It's a perfect post for someone's own blog. Otherwise, if you're putting it here, giving multi-para quotes pretty much ensures that fewer people read the entire article, as they feel they'll have read all the salient points. Or some people are like me and skip over it altogether because it's just silly.
  • I do not find it silly, but I did skip over it altogether.
  • This man is going to be the next Supreme Court Justice. People have a problem reading this, but they have no problem reading the usual Monkeyfilter posts about butt plugs and Daisy May. Interesting. Okay, people - I'm rewriting the title of the post. Clarence Thomas: God Before Constitution (and Butt Plugs) There. That should make everyone happy.
  • Well, personally, I object to your ranking system in that new title. Please rearrange those three elements to my satisfaction, please.
  • Jeez, Sully, Rehnquist isn't even dead yet. I skipped it the first time because it seemed a bit, er, premature. I have no idea who Bush will nominate for the first seat that opens up on the Supreme Court. I'm pretty sure I won't like his selection, whoever it may be. I'll worry about it when it actually happens. In the meantime, I'm not clear why you are so certain that Clarence Thomas will be elevated to Chief Justice.
  • Because he's been interviewed for the job and Bush's father got so much grief for nominating Thomas. Dubya will (in his mind) vindicate Poppy by making Thomas Chief Justice. Plus, he's the worse choice. I've learned to always expect the worse from the Bush administration.
  • Well, he is a grand-Uncle. I recall reading that he was raising a grand-nephew in an article about the amount of cash/gifts he has received in relation to others on the court. It was quite astonishing to me (over the six year-period reviewed, he was the top recipient outstripping the other justices by $30,000 or more), given how much judges in general (and their codified ethics rules) seem to be concerned with the appearance of things regardless of actual influence, and I imagine his gifts would be a big topic in any confirmation hearing for the position.